There is NO RISK in privatizing SS and investing in stock market!!!

[Jarlaxle]

Stupid statement.

 

[SteadyMercury]

The Food Inflation is bogus - it is based on substitutes, not the actual changes in the prices for specific goods.

So you've gone from "food isn't included" to the "food is bogus" that quickly?

 

[boedicca]

The Food Inflation is bogus - it is based on substitutes, not the actual changes in the prices for specific goods.

So you've gone from "food isn't included" to the "food is bogus" that quickly?

No, I haven't. When the government reports inflation, it uses the w/o Food and Energy figure as it's headline number (similar to how it uses U3 for unemployment). So that figure is bogus.

But if you wish to use the one with food and energy, that one is also bogus because of the "substitution" method. If you want to buy steak but end up buying tofu because beef has doubled in price, that's not going to be "no inflation" in to you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

Of course you realize that in order to get a fair comparison you would have to include all the people who paid into social security and never received a dime because they died or whatever because unlike social security stocks can be redeemed at any time. If I bought 100 shares of Microsoft in 50 years my kids can sell it whether I'm alive or not. Assuming Microsoft is still around in 50 years of course.

on the other hand, take a 50 year old man with grown kids and for the sake of argument let's say no spouse. He dies and bam social security pays his estate NOTHING on the money he paid in over the years.

 

[Listening]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

That's a strawman.

What you need to show is where those same people didn't have anything when the retired. I've seen people go under only to bounce back and have much more than what they will get from social security.

But under a different account system (defined contribution), there would be no getting wiped out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

Of course you realize that in order to get a fair comparison you would have to include all the people who paid into social security and never received a dime because they died or whatever because unlike social security stocks can be redeemed at any time. If I bought 100 shares of Microsoft in 50 years my kids can sell it whether I'm alive or not. Assuming Microsoft is still around in 50 years of course.

on the other hand, take a 50 year old man with grown kids and for the sake of argument let's say no spouse. He dies and bam social security pays his estate NOTHING on the money he paid in over the years.

For any person that draws out less SS then he paid in, that money stays in SS for future recipients.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

Of course you realize that in order to get a fair comparison you would have to include all the people who paid into social security and never received a dime because they died or whatever because unlike social security stocks can be redeemed at any time. If I bought 100 shares of Microsoft in 50 years my kids can sell it whether I'm alive or not. Assuming Microsoft is still around in 50 years of course.

on the other hand, take a 50 year old man with grown kids and for the sake of argument let's say no spouse. He dies and bam social security pays his estate NOTHING on the money he paid in over the years.

For any person that draws out less SS then he paid in, that money stays in SS for future recipients.

That's all well and good, but the family of the person who collected nothing would benefit more from having stocks and bonds to cash in.

I get what you are saying. But an honest conversation must start by admitting both ends of the discussion, not just one.

 

[Andylusion]

Of course there is a risk. If there was any investment that had zero risk, it would either pay zero interest, or everyone on the planet would do it and be millionaires.

There is always a risk, whether you invest in the stock market, or government. The problem is, people think there is no risk in giving your money to government. At some point, that theory will be proven false, just as it was in Argentina and Greece.

The Soviet Union is gone. People said the USSR was a riskless investment too. They were wrong. There is nothing special about America. At some point, our system will crash. Could be in a thousand years. Could be after Obama nationalizes half the economy to pay for health care. We don't know. But it *WILL* happen.

 

[bripat9643]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

Of course you realize that in order to get a fair comparison you would have to include all the people who paid into social security and never received a dime because they died or whatever because unlike social security stocks can be redeemed at any time. If I bought 100 shares of Microsoft in 50 years my kids can sell it whether I'm alive or not. Assuming Microsoft is still around in 50 years of course.

on the other hand, take a 50 year old man with grown kids and for the sake of argument let's say no spouse. He dies and bam social security pays his estate NOTHING on the money he paid in over the years.

For any person that draws out less SS then he paid in, that money stays in SS for future recipients.

Wrong. Congress spends every dime the minute it gets its filthy hands on the swag.

 

[Andylusion]

For any person that draws out less SS then he paid in, that money stays in SS for future recipients.

Was that a joke? Or do you actually not know how SS works?

The money is used to buy government bonds. In other words, the money is given to Congress, in exchange for an IOU. There is no money saved for future recipients.

The money is given to Congress, which spends it. It's gone.

The only way future recipients are paid, is by increasing taxes. They either increase the Social Security tax directly, or they increase income taxes, to pay back the IOUs. There is no trust fund. There is no money.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

If you really think the stock market is as safe as Social Security, you should be able to show us that the number of Americans who have ever seen their personal retirement accounts decimated, or wiped out, or suffered some similar damage is no more than the number of Americans who have ever lost their Social Security.

Of course you realize that in order to get a fair comparison you would have to include all the people who paid into social security and never received a dime because they died or whatever because unlike social security stocks can be redeemed at any time. If I bought 100 shares of Microsoft in 50 years my kids can sell it whether I'm alive or not. Assuming Microsoft is still around in 50 years of course.

on the other hand, take a 50 year old man with grown kids and for the sake of argument let's say no spouse. He dies and bam social security pays his estate NOTHING on the money he paid in over the years.

For any person that draws out less SS then he paid in, that money stays in SS for future recipients.

Wrong. Congress spends every dime the minute it gets its filthy hands on the swag.

LOL you believe Congress only spends money they actually have?

 

[Political Junky]

It seems a bit of a stretch to declare that investing in the stock market is safe.

 

[Listening]

It seems a bit of a stretch to declare that investing in the stock market is safe.

No more than calling social security a safety net (unless, of course, you do enjoy cat food).

Why don't you bastards vote to give people a choice to be on the program ?

You are all about women's choices. What if a woman does not want to be in the social security system (and let's be clear....that means she does not pay into the system and does not collect)....why can't you give her that choice.

Hypocrites.

 

[Vandalshandle]

THERE IS NO POOR investment decision when you are taught to think with common sense!
Common sense being you don't put all your eggs in one f...king basket especially at age 75!
AND there are people who live today under the bridge EVEN with SS!
So that's a very very lame example!
But ONCE again idiots like you TAKE The exception..i.e. EVERY ONE going to be as stupid as the
75 year old and EVERYONE will keep ALL their accumulation IN speculative stocks at 75!
That is such an inane weak cliched over worked illustration of what EXAGGERATE stories like you posted do! THEY ARE THE EXCEPTIONS!
Do you understand???
Of course you don't because it doesn't fit your meme! Look it up dummy!

"idiots", "dummy", etc., etc. Frankly Myth, I am not in the mood for your immature name calling and fractured financial rants about issues that you know nothing about. Your are on ignore. I'll give you 2 or 3 years and see if you have grown up enough to have a civil conversation with adults.

 

[bripat9643]

It seems a bit of a stretch to declare that investing in the stock market is safe.

It's also a stretch to call Social Security an "investment."

 

[healthmyths]

THERE IS NO POOR investment decision when you are taught to think with common sense!
Common sense being you don't put all your eggs in one f...king basket especially at age 75!
AND there are people who live today under the bridge EVEN with SS!
So that's a very very lame example!
But ONCE again idiots like you TAKE The exception..i.e. EVERY ONE going to be as stupid as the
75 year old and EVERYONE will keep ALL their accumulation IN speculative stocks at 75!
That is such an inane weak cliched over worked illustration of what EXAGGERATE stories like you posted do! THEY ARE THE EXCEPTIONS!
Do you understand???
Of course you don't because it doesn't fit your meme! Look it up dummy!

"idiots", "dummy", etc., etc. Frankly Myth, I am not in the mood for your immature name calling and fractured financial rants about issues that you know nothing about. Your are on ignore. I'll give you 2 or 3 years and see if you have grown up enough to have a civil conversation with adults.

Right... that's how little kids handle the facts. Plug their ears and say my mind's made up don't confuse me!
Of course you are an idiot! You like MOSt idiots think when you read stories about A FEW people that lose money then YOU make that THE RULE! Just like idiots are doing with Ferguson MO episodes.. taking the EXCEPTION blowing it out of proportion and making it sound like it HAPPENS all the time everywhere EVERYDAY!
See I call you an idiot because you ONLY look at the exceptions... AND yes there have been down
days in the market! NO question! BUT idiots like you use those EXCEPTIONS as if they happen all the time and idiots like you obviously don't know that over

Dow Industrial Average Stock Market Index Historical Graph DJIA

In the 112 years of the DJIA:

there have been 40 years where there was no gain but losses.

There has been nearly twice as many (73 years) with gains.
The biggest loss 1931 52.7%.
The biggest gain 1915 81.7%
The average over those 112 years has been a growth of 7.25%

MORE then 73 years gains... 40 years loss! AND the biggest lose 52.7% while the biggest gain 81%
and here you f...king indiot...
OVER the 112 years an average growth of 7.25%
SO PLEASE when idiots like you LEARN to have a little perspective there maybe so respect for you... till then you are relegated to the IDIOT BIN!!

 

[rdean]

There is NO RISK in privatizing SS and investing in stock market!!!
Yea, tell that to the economic meltdown Republicans caused during the Bush years. They were as right about deregulation as they are about gambling retirement savings in the stock market. There recent record on being right about stuff has been amazing in the last 15 years. Iraq, deregulation, the Bush Tax cuts, cut education, look how well it's all worked for the country.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It seems a bit of a stretch to declare that investing in the stock market is safe.

This thread is really just about the absurdity of radical rightwingers trying to justify some sort of extremist privatization ideology that they've been programmed to worship.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Okay, you want to invest the Trust Fund in the stock market instead of US treasury securities?

Fine, step one is, the Federal government has to come up with 2+ trillion in tax revenue to pay off the bonds.

Are you willing to see your income taxes go up to pay for that or do you just want to tack that onto the deficit and debt?